Break one, get three free
Posted by india in PredictionsOct 26th, 2007 | one responseMy friend Marc and I were discussing the imminent war in Iraq in
2002. I made a prediction and have been meaning to post it for
sometime, for no reason other than to say ‘aha I said so!’ when it
comes true. So five years later …..
Iraq will become three regions. The southern Shia dominated region will get absorbed by Iran. Sectarianism demands it.
The northern part which is Kurd dominated will become Kurdistan,
maybe a US-European protectorate. Though there are sizeable Kurdish
populations in Turkey and Iran, it will be long till there is a proper
Kurdistan, it at all. Also, a landlocked nation like the Iraqi
Kurdistan cannot survive and prosper without an umbrella of protection
from great powers.
The middle portion of Iraq will join the Hashemite Kingdom of
Jordan. Hashemite king Faisal I ruled Iraq till 1958. Of course, he was
assassinated during a military coup in 1958. Does Jordan and its King
Abdullah II want more headache, with no oil attached, is another
question.
Sovereignty of many modern states is overrated. Luckily I am not
future candidate for Secretary of State, Foreign Minister, Prime
Minister or President. Otherwise that statement would come to haunt me
some day.
Nation-state is a western concept and a fine one too, most of the
time. But nation-states should evolve naturally. Constituents of such
states must not be like oil and water. No pun intended. Sometime it is
foolish, and dangerous, to take sovereignty of certain nation-states
serious. Especially states cobbled together by fast retreating has-been
powers.
As I write this, Iraq is a temporary mess. Iran is cautiously
helping the west and at the same time fishing in troubled sands. Turkey
is moving troops towards Iraqi northern border to ostensibly fight
Kurdish extremists. Syria is busy doing something secret with Israel.
Are they talking or shooting, not sure. (Israeli jets violated Syrian
airspace and bombed something and not a peep from Syria or anyone else.
Something is up. I am yet to be informed what.) Jordan is calm. Scary!
Iraq is a temporary mess. Yankees will leave. As always. The
Persians and the Bedouins will wait them out. For a region that has
witnessed shifting sands for centuries, this is just another day. Lines
in the sand drawn, by vain humans and irreverent desert winds.
Interestingly, if the west (read US) wants to make the middle east
not so relevant there is a way. Get rid of the US Department of Energy
and eliminate all subsidies on oil. Let the middle eastern countries
pay for the security of its oil and shipping lines. Not US tax payer
with their white elephant war ships. Let the price of middle eastern
oil soar to its natural levels. Other oil regions, some with nukes,
will become more important. Oil will price itself out of the market to
alternate energy.
Those words-alternate energy-itself is absurd. As if there is oil
and then there are other sources of energy. Shows the predicament we
are in. Oil has the globe by its balls.
Another interesting thought. Blood is supposed to be thicker than
water. But is religion thicker than oil. Israel gets its support from
the west for lots of good and foolish reasons. Two important ones are
oil and religion. Oily one is obvious. Religious one is more
interesting as it has a millennial feel to it. Christian conservatives
in the US, politically resurgent in recent decades, have developed a
special longing for Israel. Holy land, born again, second coming of
Christ, resurgent militant Islam, 9/11. You name it and Israel is in
the middle.
Israel also acts as a proxy and an outpost for guarding oil interest
of the west. Since westerners, even non-Christians and
non-Conservatives, need oil this makes supporting Israel secular affair
too. But what happens when oil becomes less relevant. It will one day
and that is for sure. Will religion alone carry the weight of
supporting Israel when oil is gone?
Talking about religion. Will Islam, which is the fastest growing
religion in the world, still surge when oil is gone? Ironic it will be,
if both Israel and Islam gets less attention, when oil is less relevant.
Finally, I love hypocrisy. The more blatant the better. I especially
love the hypocrisy of non-westerners like me. We get to cast our stones
and have our oil too. All at the expense of the US tax payers. They pay
for the security of the middle eastern oil routes. My guess, and this
is purely a guess, is that US would be better off focusing on South
America and may be even ‘nucular’ Russia and its vassal. Would be
better off kicking Chavez and Che around and protecting oil flow from
the south. Integrate Russia into NATO. This makes integrating its
smaller neighbours, who fear and hate Russia’s historic and future
hegemony and aggression, into NATO redundant.
Instead they spend inordinate amount of resource and lives in the
middle east. And the beneficiaries are Indians and Chinese. Rest of
Asia and Europe too. Without the US meddling we would have had to boss
the Arabs and bloody our hands. (By the way, we are beginning to do
this in Africa. Boys and girls, get your malaria medicine and yellow
fever vaccine ready. For we are going to Africa for oil and more. Brown
man’s burden you see). This way we get to accuse the Americans of
imperialism and enjoy its fruits. Have the cake and eat it too.
American with their can do attitude and wild west optimism have a lot
to learn from us Asians. ‘Master, teach me kung fu’ says the hackneyed
white guy to the Asian in cheesy, B-grade martial art movies. It should
be ‘Master, teach me geopolitics and foreign policy’. Classic!
Related posts:
One Response to “Break one, get three free”
Leave a Reply
About Me
Some points about this article…
I am unwilling to go out on a limb and make predictions concerning the future divisions of Iraq. There are too many players with competing interests. Only a tyrant like Saddam Hussein could have held disparate ethnic groups like that together in a “state”, and I don’t think the West was unhappy with his “order” for much of his career; after all, they helped engineer his rise. The Western nation-states arose in particular historical circumstances which were at times pretty violent and ugly, and were unsettled even into the twentieth century. It is therefore predictable that nation-state ideas imposed by imperial powers on nomadic tribes would not achieve legitimacy.
I do not believe there was ever any intention by the American administration to make a “democracy” out of Iraq, unless it was the sort that American likes, which is a legislature or executive that will go on the payroll. Those who understand this are always quick to point out the “concern” of Washington with Iraq and its lack of “concern” with Sudan.
The Americans will leave in some measure but rest assured that this prediction will come true: the United States will be left with military installations and some long-term lease. Iraq will serve as a nice central position for protecting its interests in the Middle East against the rising needs of India or China or elsewhere. Unless someone has evidence to the contrary I believe you’ll find that contractors are building installations of a durable nature in Iraq.
With present technology fossil fuels are the key to power, and the United States can no longer afford to leave so much of the proven oil reserves unprotected, or for that matter available to someone else. I may be wrong, and these figures change almost weekly, but I think that Iraq and Iran account for about 20% of known reserves.
Israel will continue its remarkable relationship with the United States even if oil is no longer in the picture, in the same way that the English-speaking parts of the world do with the US, because of historical relationships with prime ethnic groups. The UK has tied itself to our interests since we overtook their influence in the twentieth century, and they are related to the oldest and still potent power-elites in America. The Jews make up, by their own reckoning, about 20% of the Ivy League college elite, and are per capita the most successful ethnic group in the country. It is difficult for the upper and middle classes of the United States to oppose support for Israel when membership in those classes brings one into contact socially and financially with Jewish members of the professions. For Conservative Jews at least, support for a “Jewish State” is at least as important a cultural touchstone as the Muslims find in preserving the territorial integrity of the original Muslim conquests of the seventh century AD onwards.
I see no end to the turmoil in the Middle East in our lifetimes.